Posts Tagged ‘SFMTA’

Here’s One Reason, Just One Reason, Why the Expensive “SFPark” Surge Pricing Experiment Failed

Tuesday, January 6th, 2015

One reason the federally-funded SFPark program failed is that the maximum rate of $6 per hour* was too low to garner the benefits promised.

So, as here on Chestnut Street, it doesn’t really matter all that much if the meters charge $1 or $3 or $6 an hour – during busy times, the metered spaces will be occupied like 98%+ of the time. Times like these:

7J7C1687 copy

So why couldn’t a “market” pricing-based experiment charge more than $6 an hour? Well, politics.

Oh well.

Maybe the feds will give us another $20 million worth of pork and then we can do SFPark again?

Maybe

*Outside of “special event” pricing, when it could/can go up to $72 an hour.

This MUNI Bus Ad is Not the Way “Debunk” “Myths” About Homeless People

Monday, January 5th, 2015

Why not say this instead?

Most homeless people in San Francisco aren’t from San Francisco

7J7C2073 copy

Care to debunk that “myth,” anyone?

No, OK. And actually, most residents of SF, both homed and homeless, are from somewhere else, right? Is that a bad thing? Oh, you think it’s a bad thing, or you think other people think it’s a bad thing?

And oh, so what you’re actually saying is that homeless people in SF sometimes find housing?

Oh, OK. So noted. But why do you need a bus ad for that? Oh, to “support MUNI?” So why don’t we just give the money directly to MUNI instead of letting you all siphon off most of the dough?

You know, sometimes leadership elements of monomaniacal nonprofits “frame” issues so much that they end up lying.

How does that help?

How does this ad help?

Leaving San Francisco’s Unconstitutional Church Parking Policy Aside, This Isn’t How You Should Park on Bush Street

Friday, January 2nd, 2015

So fine, you have a church and SFGov lets you tell your attendees it’s OK to park on the street out front.

Because this policy is unconstitutional, the SFMTA can’t lay down any official rules to the game. But I can.

So, when you’re completely filling up an entire city block with cars, you churches ought to leave the spaces near crosswalks empty.

You see, this kind of a thing here is a problem:

7J7C1540 copy

So, keep your cars at least 30 feet away from any crosswalk, how’s that for a rule?

Oh, what’s that, you don’t care? Well, OK. But following this rule would be the Christian thing to do, right, Christian?

How Would Jesus Park? Well, He wouldn’t double park so close to a crosswalk, that’s for sure…

END OF LINE

KALW Thoroughly Explores Methods to Undermine Our First Amendment – KALW Goes Beyond The Pale

Tuesday, December 23rd, 2014

Hey, do you know what I’m “offended” about, you know, having to do with America’s most dangerous and slowest big city transit service, well I’m offended by how slow it is and how badly it reacts to bad behavior by its operators.

But that’s just me.

Now look at the universe of reactions that KALW permits you after people were “devastated” to see some ads on the sides of a few buses:

San Francisco MUNI buses displayed an ad that may have:

upset you.

Or angered you.

Or made you feel threatened”

That’s it, those are your options.

Rob Anderson is quite correct to mock KALW.

Read the whole bit to see the tone and then see if you agree with me, if you want.

IMO, this bit from KALW is beyond the pale.

JMO

 

An Update on CAR2GO Car Sharing in SF: The Giant FREE PARKING Logos are Gone

Tuesday, December 23rd, 2014

Read all about it. So how does this work, you see a car and then you use it to get wherever and then you park it legally and then you’re done with it? Mmm…

As seen on Fell in December 2014:

P1170755 copy

All right, I’m making this an ASSIGNMENT DESK.

So, what is CAR2GO. Why didn’t the corrupt SFMTA approve of it back in 2013, when it greenlighted a bunch of other transportation schemes? What happened to the FREE PARKING words on the sides of the cars? (One imagines that could be a touchy issue for those in the City Attorney’s Office.) What’s the status of it now in the 415?

So many questions!

Offensive Parking: The Owner of This Hybrid Sure is a Brave Soul to Park This Way on Fell, Year After Year

Monday, December 22nd, 2014

Day after day, week after week, month after month, year after year:

P1170754 copy

I’m surprised the owner of this gas electric hybrid has managed to maintain this parking lifestyle for so long.

(If you tried this in Pac Heights, offended dog walkers would have DPT ticket you into submission, tout de suite.)

Oh, the Urbanity! Incoming SF Bicycle Coalition Director Noah Budnick is Looking for a 2-Bedroom Apartment for _Less_ than $3K per Month

Friday, December 19th, 2014

Wow, a person made a post trying to help out incoming San Francisco Bicycle Coalition Director Noah Budnick by getting the word out about an apartment hunt

And check it, the poster is just like me, as he doesn’t agree with with everything the SFBC does AND he thinks the SFBC is an effective advocacy group.

And here it is:

“While I don’t agree with everything SFBC does, it is certainly the most effective advocacy group I’ve ever belonged to. And here’s a way to help them: by finding  their new director, who is moving here from the east coast, an apartment in San Francisco. I know xx#xers care a lot about bicycle advocacy, and we all know that finding an apartment here is a bloodsport where knowing tenants and landlords is a definite advantage, hence this message.

Desired attributes:
• Close to a BART stop
• Two bedrooms
• Less than $3,000/month

If you have any leads, please email me and I’ll make the connection.”

The kicker is that NY Noah wants his crib to be in SF and he wants it to be close to a BART stop.

(IDK, these requirements rule out Crackton as an option.)

I think I’d advise young Noah to lower his expectations, but who knows – it’s in any event smart to get the word out.

This was the first of many replies:

“Awwwww, he’s adorable. I hear Daly City is nice…”

Ouch.

Now lately, the SFBC has stopped boasting of its increasing membership, because lately membership is way down – thousands of people have decided not to re-up. Now why is that?

Mmmm…

Now you tell me – which is a bigger problem to solve? Is it:

1. Finding a “nice” 2-bed close to BART for $2K-something in 2014; or

2. Finding 2K-something more people to join the SFBC AND then get them continue paying dues, year after year.

That’s a toughie.

Best MUNI Bus Ad Ever: “Have a Compassionate Holiday Season” – Be Kind to Turkeys” – UNITED POULTRY CONCERN

Thursday, December 18th, 2014

Turkeys – Who Are They?

7J7C0668 copy

Here It Is: The Infamous Line of Double-Parked Cars in Front of Rainbow Grocery – How Do We Solve This Longstanding Problem?

Thursday, December 18th, 2014

I don’t know, but SFGov is powerless, it appears.

Here’s some history on the issue.

And here’s how things look in 2014 – nothing’s changed:

7J7C0641 copy

Oh well…

Ed Reiskin Refuses to Comply with the SFMTA Citizens Advisory Council, So Let’s Run a Trial on Masonic Ourselves

Wednesday, December 17th, 2014

Here’s the Citizens Advisory Council’s recommendation that Ed Reiskin, operator of America’s slowest and least efficient big-city transit system, has refused:

“Motion 140122.01 – The SFMTA CAC recommends that the peak hour restrictions be repealed on Masonic Avenue between Geary and Fell Streets, with the objective to measure traffic impacts on the 43 Masonic prior to the implementation of the Masonic Avenue street design project.”

Why did he do that? Well, because a “success” for him is the SFMTA spending the money it’s been given to spend. So why should he do anything to interfere with that when he’s in the red zone already?

Anywho, you can read what he has to say about a test-run after the jump.

In view of this dysfunction, let’s run a Masonic “streetscape” trial of our own, shall we?

Let’s start here, northbound, on the 3000 foot stretch of Masonic that will soon be changed: 

7J7C0082 copy

See the bus? It’s stopped at a bus stop, let’s imagine. That means that Masonic will be down to one lane inbound, you know, temporarily, during the morning drive. How will this affect traffic, do you suppose? How many minutes will it add to your commute each way, each day? Mmmm…

Since we’re imagining, imagine a large median filled with trees on either side of the double yellow line. Now is that for safety or for aesthetics? The answer is that it’s for aesthetics. Compare that with the SFMTA’s disastrous, expensive, deadly 105-foot-wide Octavia “Boulevard” / I-80 on ramp. Yes, it’s has a vegetated median as well. So, is “safety” the SFMTA’s “number one goal?” No, not at all. Its real goal is expanding its payroll and spending ever more money. So of course if you pressure it to do things you want done, like planting trees in the middle of the street, which, of course, has nothing to do with safety, it will happily comply.

Will any commuters benefit from these soon-to-come “improvements?” No, not at all. These changes are going to slow the commute way down and that will impede people in cars and MUNI buses. Did the SFMTA do any “outreach” to / with commuters? Nope. It didn’t feel like it. The SFMTA prefers to host meetings packed with “urbanists” and San Francisco Bicycle Coalition employees and members. Do these people represent “the public?” No, not at all. Yet the SFMTA claims do have done public outreach.

How will these changes to Masonic, the Great Connector, affect the surrounding area? We’ll just have to wait and see. If, later on, you raise any issues with the SFMTA about the negative effects of all their changes, they’ll be all, well, expand our budget even more and we’ll redo the project again to fix this and that.

Of course, the way to run the trial run would be simply take away all the parking spaces for a day or so, right? So what you’d do is just simply shut down the slow lanes as a test. This alternative would satisfry (mmmm, Satisfries…. R.I.P) at least some of the objections that Ed Reiskin, operator of America’s slowest and least efficient big-city transit system, mentioned.

Would Ed Reiskin want to try this alternative trial? No, not at all. (See above.) Mr. R will be happy to ignore all the complaints only after the tens of millions of dollars have been spent.

Do I think that a bunch of people riding MUNI and driving cars every day, tens of thousands of people, are going say, wow, my commute has really slowed down after all these changes so I’m going to join the handful of souls on bicycles huffing and puffing up this big hill? Nope. Some might, of course, but it won’t be any kind of meaningful number.

And do I think it’s honest for SFMTA employees to tell higher authorities that’s there’s no public opposition to these changes? Nope. Oh well.

All right, that’s the thought experiment. It looks like this one’s going to go like a bunch of other SFMTA-created initiatives, you know, like the ideologically-driven traffic circles,  the absurdly-wide Octavia “Boulevard,” the crazy re-striping of the east end of JFK Drive – they’ll just look at them all and then pat themselves on the back and hand each other awards for these “accomplishments,” these “successes.”

[UPDATE: Oh yeah, a couple people asked me if I approve of this project. And like, I live a block away, but it won’t really affect me, myself, I don’t think. Seems selfish to think now-hey-what-about-me, anyway. What ended up happening  with Octavia is that they really biased the lights in favor of Octavia, so people have to wait to a long time to get across the whole 105 foot width. So maybe it’ll be a 90-second wait to get across Masonic when all is said and done? IDK, it’s hard to predict how much the SFMTA is going to mess things up with this arbor project, this tree planting diversion. So, what will the affects be? Will commuters abandon Masonic? How will they get around instead? IDK]

On It Goes…

Now, as promised, a note from Ed Reiskin, after the jump

(more…)